Sleight Of Arms

While the Democrats have continued to shriek about Rush Limbaugh’s mildly inappropriate — albeit accurate — remarks about a fake “activist” offering fake “testimony” at a fake “hearing,” the situation in the Mideast has heated up faster than Democratic Party leader Bill Maher during coupon night at a Nevada brothel.

That’s right, kiddies. While we’ve been watching the Democrats run through their deliberately distracting rhetorical gymnastics, the Israelis, the Syrians, the Iranians and a handful of the Islamofascist terrorist groups funded by the latter two nations are one spooked camel away from all-out war.

Hundreds of rockets have rained down on Israel, which has routinely responded by dropping planeloads of ordinance on warrens of adherents to the “religion of peace.” Behind the Muslim missiles stand those redoubtable godfathers of Islamofascist terrorism: Iran and Syria (not to mention the Russians and the Red Chinese). Behind the Israeli air assaults stands the United States. Oh, joy! Another proxy war is in the offing.

Unless it isn’t.

While Syria devotes time and resources to the terrorists who murder Israelis, the reality is that the Syrians are fairly consumed by their increasingly nasty intramural squabble. Iran, however, seems perfectly willing to shake its fists at Israel and, by extension, us. The problem is that should the Iranians decide to put their children where their blowholes are, a war between Iran and Israel combined with the usual hijinks that engulf the Mideast would likely conflate into a global shooting war. Such a war would put the entire planet a hair’s breadth from nuclear conflagration, especially considering the Iranian pursuit of nuclear weapons and Islamofascists’ general tendency to demonstrate the same restraint as Michael Moore at an all-you-can-eat buffet.

Amid this theater of the armed and absurd, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta acknowledged last week during testimony in front of the Senate that the Administration of President Barack Obama does not think it requires Congressional approval to involve the United States in a shooting war.

“…our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this

While Panetta’s admission was hardly groundbreaking — Obama has already made it clear that he believes himself to be above trivialities such as Constitutional dictates and the separation of powers — the timing is worth noting. Of late, the Democrats have been pressing the idea that the Republicans are pushing them toward war. But Panetta’s statement that Obama neither needs nor cares about Congressional approval belies their halfhearted protests.

Despite — or perhaps because of — the Democrat’s ludicrous attempts to make their sock puppet Sandra Fluke the story of the season, Obama is struggling as November approaches. The newest polls show him losing to Mitt Romney, his approval numbers are horrendous, and his intended centerpiece of his legacy (Obamacare) is less popular than a bar of soap in an Occupy Wall Street squatters’ camp. And the Democrats — defined by hypocrisy as they are — would gladly commit the Nation to war if they thought it might rescue Obama’s electoral hopes.

If Israel wants to knock its Islamofascist irritants down a peg or two, it’s welcome to it. I might even suggest that it’s demonstrated impressive restraint, given the circumstances. But Obama campaigned on opposition to costly wars. To mire us in another would take him to a new low, especially considering the cuts he’s made to our military. If we’re going to avoid joining him, we should — we must — see past the distractions.

–Ben Crystal

Going West

Under normal circumstances, Presidential appointments to Federal posts earn — and deserve — no more scrutiny than an individual cockroach in the horde that just scurried back under your fridge. In fact, most Americans can name only the Federal appointees who draw extreme controversy in the form of the ire of the President’s opposition. Think: Democrat with “nanny issues” or Republican who is black.

President Barack Obama’s decision to elevate Tony West to the position of acting associate attorney general, which will rank him third on the ladder at the Department of Justice, falls into the “abnormal” category. West, who currently serves as the assistant attorney general for the Civil Division, embodies the spectacularly poor judgment that seems to coincide with nearly every declaration that has escaped Obama’s fevered brain.

Prior to his entrenchment in the dark corners of the Obama Administration, West enjoyed a career as a noteworthy attorney — albeit noteworthy for his choice of clientele rather than any legal hurdles he may have leapt along the way. West is the ambulance-chaser who rode shotgun in the courtroom for John Walker Lindh, among other clients of ill repute. If you’re scratching your head in an effort to locate Lindh’s name, check in Afghanistan. Lindh is the infamous “American Taliban” who joined the jihadis and took up arms for Islamofascism, only to be caught and stuffed in a cage for 20 years. West is the guy who tried to spring him.

And now, West is in line to play catcher for Attorney General Eric Holder. With Obama at the top, Holder right behind him and West backing Holder, Obama has created a Federal law enforcement agency run by the man behind Operation Fast and Furious and the man behind any Tariq, Dhakir or Hakim who gets nicked aiming an AK-47 at the 1st Ranger Battalion. To quote the sage: “What could possibly go wrong?”

In an interview Sunday with Fox News, J. Christian Adams — the former Justice Department lawyer who blew the whistle on Holder’s refusal to prosecute Obama’s allies in the New Black Panther Party hate group — said: “The most dangerous thing is that West is overseeing Gitmo policy. It’s not that he’s just some guy at the Justice Department licking envelopes.” Appointing a radical like West to the No. 3 spot would actually give him direct authority over operations like the terrorist detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. While I’m sure that would make it convenient for West to reminisce with some of his old pals, we’re not talking about giving the wolf the keys to the chicken coop; we’re talking about giving the wolf the keys to your front door.

In the wake of West’s advancement, some have questioned the nature of discourse in a Justice Department run by people like Obama, Holder and West.  My response: Exactly what debate do we think actually rages through the halls of the DoJ? A President with the same respect for the Constitution as Bill Maher has for women, an Attorney General with the same respect for the rule of law as — well — Maher has for women and soon to be an associate attorney general with the same level of respect for the security of our Nation. Something tells me the only debate raging through the halls of the Department of Justice involves which falafel joint has the best takeout.

In the interest of full disclosure, West made it to the job from which he’s moving up with an 82-4 vote in the Senate. That means a fair number of Republican Senators either fell asleep at the switch or willingly flipped it in the wrong direction. Either situation requires a gross dereliction of duty. The politicians who purport to represent conservatives fumbled the ball on an entirely unacceptable and potentially dangerous liberal DoJ appointee. You’ll forgive me if I don’t pass out from the shock.

But the Republicans in the Senate who nodded off and let West slip past them are accomplices after the fact. The big question is: What kind of President — what kind of man — allows this man inside the DoJ unless he’s wearing leg irons? After three years of Obama and his cronies’ wild ride, we already know the answer.

–Ben Crystal

Hell Hath No Faux Fury

This past Saturday, Rush Limbaugh apologized to Sandra Fluke for calling her a “slut;” among other remarks. The truth is, Limbaugh should have apologized; but not for the reasons every shrieking banshee of a liberal from here to Nancy Pelosi’s war room and back believe. Pointing out that Fluke has prostituted herself to the liberal cause was entirely fair; mostly because the characterization is entirely accurate.

Let us avoid offering Fluke too much sympathy. She paid for the bed; now she gets to — er — lay on it. Fluke — who we now know was never some shrinking violet dragged into the spotlight of purported conservative sexism; but was, and is, another sad sack who sold her soul to Pelosi and her minions — will come to regret allowing the Democrats to turn her into a Muppet. But, that’s the price of doing business with the dark side, Sandy. When they’ve moved on to the next weird little prop in their crusade for control, Fluke will be left counting No. 2 pencils in the basement of the House Minority Counsel’s office and reminiscing about how cool it was being important for a few months.

A couple of weeks ago, the unhinged Democratic spokesmouth and Kennedy fetishist Chris Matthews told Mimi Alford to “shut up.” Alford published a book detailing her life; and in the course of doing so, revealed some borderline pornographic albeit unsurprising details about the late — and fraudulently elected — President John F. Kennedy.

A woman dared to point out that one of the great icons of liberalism ran the White House like a junior varsity Playboy mansion and Matthews and the liberals went at her like they were David Brock and she was a kilo of pure Bogota nose candy. Granted, JFK fit her in between romps with Marilyn Monroe and half the gun molls on the Eastern Seaboard and she survived; so she should probably count her blessings. And yet, liberals are outraged by Limbaugh’s remarks.

The breathtakingly unfunny Bill Maher — who continues to exist on pay cable for no reason I can discern — used language about Sarah Palin which makes “slut” seem like a compliment. Of course Maher, who is one of the loudest mouthpieces in the Democratic ranks, talks like that a lot. In fact Maher is likely the crudest of the liberal sock puppets; and he is lauded for his crudeness. And yet, liberals are outraged by Limbaugh’s remarks.

The liberal stormtroopers who think spectacularly sexist — and shockingly sexualized — remarks about Sarah Palin, Jan Brewer, Michele Bachmann, Laura Ingraham (at whom Ed Schultz directed the EXACT SAME EPITHET), Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter and any other woman who dare to disagree with the white male millionaires who control the Democratic Party are acceptable, are outraged by Limbaugh’s remarks. Spare us all your phony feminism, Democrats. You’re only fooling yourselves.

Nonetheless, calling the latest prop in the Democrats’ Cirque de Hypocrisy a “slut” was artless and crude. That sort of language is best left to the slimy underbelly of American political discourse; like the liberals who are outraged by Limbaugh’s remarks.

Way Off Target

President Barack Obama’s former White House Chief of Staff, current Chicago mayor and eternal Democratic godfather Rahm Emanuel advised: “You never let a serious crisis go to waste.” In keeping with the philosophy of the hollow-eyed Gollum of Grant Park on turning public tragedy into political treasure, liberals from the ivory towers of the corporate media to the sewers of the left-wing blogosphere have raised the hue and cry about firearms in the wake of the killing of three students, allegedly at the hand of the severely disturbed T.J. Lane in Chardon, Ohio.

Of course, the bodies are not yet cold and the tears not yet dry. But by all that is Obama-approved, the Democrats will turn this sordid tale into a volley fire at the battlements of the Bill of Rights — or further humiliate themselves trying.

Leading the charge of the lout brigade was, of course, MSNBC, aka the Democrat Channel. Someone named Alex Wagner, who apparently worked for the George Soros-backed vomiteers at ThinkProgress before running away to join the MSNBC circus, donned her tinfoil hat on Tuesday, ranting:

“… the only protection against gun violence is, in the end, the law. And yet, in the very same states that have seen the country’s grisliest gun crimes — Colorado, Virginia and Ohio — state legislators have — remarkably — tried to weaken gun control…”

Well, Obama forbid anyone mention the law, the police, some semblance of personal conduct or even common decency — all of which Lane ignored — to the intrepid Wagner. Clearly, showing regard for the victims and their families never entered the equation, although we’ll forgive MSNBC for its macabre scavenging. It needs the sensationalism; it has nary a viewer to spare.

It’s also worth noting Wagner’s resurrection of the almost laughably clichéd phrase “gun violence.”  Every time liberals need to blame the bugaboo of firearms and/or the National Rifle Association for some human-caused tragedy they pull out that phrase. Dismissing “gun violence” as a weak-kneed leftist catchphrase is trite. But when a group of devout Democrats get together to exploit senseless violence in an effort to breach the walls of the Bill of Rights, clichéd and trite are as close as anyone is likely to get to logic and reason.

Meanwhile, the Democrat hate-speech clearinghouse Dailykos featured Sam Diener, the “Education Coordinator” at the “Center for Nonviolent Solutions.” Diener scribbled out nearly 1,700 words under the heading “Talking Points on the School Shooting in Chardon OH.” In the text of the predictably far-left screed, Diener states flatly what has yet to be proven: “Guns increase danger.” Actually, people with malevolent intentions increase danger; guns are merely a tool. Blaming guns for what Lane allegedly did in Chardon is like blaming General Motors for the death of Mary Jo Kopechne.

Guns are merely a scapegoat for the misdirected wrath of a liberal movement that is always quick to excuse criminal behavior. Consider the fact that the same Democrats who routinely demand an abrogation of the Bill of Rights will line up to defend people who use guns to commit violent crimes, notably if they’re African-American and if the crimes involve killing police officers.

Furthermore, consider the fact that Democrat-controlled cities like Detroit, Washington and Obama’s and Emanuel’s hometown, Chicago, are virtual war zones despite draconian anti-gun laws.

I often refer to what I like to call “the politics of easy.” It is indeed easy to blame guns for crimes such as those Lane allegedly committed. Being inanimate objects, guns are unlikely to muster much of a defense. It’s easier still to use anti-gun rhetoric in defense of criminal behavior — especially when said defense will provide brickbats with which to attack their political enemies. And if said enemies — in the opinion of the liberal elite — need to be disarmed, that’s all the better. So what if some personal tragedies need to be turned into stage characters in a twisted liberal passion play?

–Ben Crystal

The Not-So-Great Eight

While the Republican Presidential candidates vie for top billing in Tampa, Fla., the Democrats have evidently convinced themselves that President Barack Obama is a shoo-in for another four-year occupation of the White House. Let me rephrase that: The Democrats are trying desperately to convince themselves that President Barack Obama is a shoo-in for another four-year occupation of the White House.

Isn’t it interesting, then, that their anointed savior can’t muster up approval ratings that consistently eclipse the 50 percent mark? Isn’t it more interesting that some polls show Obama packing his gear and clearing out in favor of — among other people — Congressman Ron Paul, a man about whom the media can hardly bring themselves to comment? Isn’t it even more interesting that the corporate media can’t (won’t) mention Obama’s anemic performance, but will offer fealty that borders on blasphemy?

The list of reasons why the thinking voter should eschew casting a ballot for Obama is nearly as long as a Russian novel, but you don’t have the time and we don’t have the bandwidth to enumerate them all here. Each week, I put together a video commentary for Personal Liberty Digest® entitled “The Great Eight.”  Today, I offer you a print version. With apologies to David Letterman (and my production crew):

From our home office in Cullman, Ala., it’s the top eight reasons not to vote for Barack Obama this fall.

8.  Permanent Vacation.

Spain, Hawaii, Martha’s Vineyard, more Hawaii, more Martha’s Vineyard, Aspen and even more Hawaii. Remember how much the liberals hated George W. Bush’s brush-clearing misadventures? At least he was pretending to work once in a while — at his own house. And don’t we all enjoy being lectured about our eating habits by the first lady — in between her 2,500-calorie fundraiser meals, of course. Hypocrisy is ugly. No wonder the Democrats are so damned hard on our eyes — even when they’re wearing diamonds from the Harry Winston Collection.

7.  The Devil-May-Obamacare.

For a great socialist leap forward, the President’s reanimation of Hillarycare’s corpse has taken an oddly back-shelf position of late. It’s almost as if the Democrats don’t want us remembering that they ignored public sentiment, the rules of legislative engagement and one or two juicy parts of the Constitution as November rolls toward us. I suspect Obama may come to regret his decision to force churches to pay for abortions, but that’s presuming he develops a conscience and understanding of the 1st Amendment between now and Election Day. Knowing the liberal mindset, he’ll lose and blame the loss on us “God and guns” types. I’d say more, but it might move my name up on the death panel (yes, Virginia, they are real) list.

6.  Gassed Out.

As much fun as the Democrats’ new sitcom “That was then; this is now” has been to watch, I just don’t see a real future for it. Their attempt to cut Obama loose from that $5 per gallon gas-price anchor he’s dragging around is sadder than Arianna Huffington’s wedding videos. When George W. Bush was President, exorbitant gas prices spurred Democrats including Senator Barbara Boxer and current Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz to hold shrieking press events in which they blamed Bush for everything short of trapping people in their homes. The corporate media obligingly reported the liberal finger-pointing with breathless vigor. Now, gas prices are evidently rising in a vacuum, with the same people suggesting Obama has “little control” over them. That was then; this is now.

5.  Hooray For Hollywood.

Obama leans heavily on financial and propaganda support from the left coast as much as he does on anyone outside the offices of Goldman Sachs. Hollywood’s hypocritical horde has hardly hidden their disdain for non-liberals. But they seem to forget: Only liberals are dumb enough to vote based on advice from renowned thinkers like Sean Penn and Rosie O’Donnell. Sean, go back to Venezuela. Maybe Hugo Chavez will let you be his court jester. Rosie, have another sundae. Oscar host Billy Crystal (no relation; I eat bacon) cracked a joke during the recent Academy Award yawnfest in which he compared Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich to a “dark knight, an American psycho and a charismatic crack addict.” The crowd roared with laughter. I noticed that a whole team of writers put their thinking caps on to produce a joke that wasn’t fit for amateur night at the Ha-Ha Hut. Of course, Romney, Santorum and Gingrich probably thought “I’m totally the dark knight in that one.” That’s actually pretty funny, when you think about it. Maybe Billy’s a distant cousin.

4. Crony Capitalism.

So, religious (read: Christian) organizations get stuck with the same onerous Obamacare mandates that the Democrats’ union thug cronies managed to escape? All those exemptions, and Obama couldn’t find one more for the people who believe abortion is murder? Meanwhile, General Motors is certainly heating things up since its bailout; those Chevy Volts are really hot — in a manner of speaking. And all those so-called “green jobs” projects have produced in spades, have they not? Granted, the “jobs” in question all went to bankruptcy lawyers; but at least someone benefited from Obama’s payoff to his cronies. It was certainly heartbreaking watching those poor attorneys wandering around outside the courthouse. “Will guide you through Chapter 7 for food.” A look at Obamanomics reveals the biggest beneficiaries are guys like Warren Buffett, George Soros and Jeff Immelt (not to mention Mark Rezko). When hypocritical billionaires are hurting, Obama is there for them. What a guy.

3.  Let’s Hear It For The Girls!

Tell you what, liberals. You keep Janeane Garofalo, Barbra Streisand, Sheila Jackson-Lee and — I’m guessing here — Janet Napolitano. We’ll keep Bo Derek, Anne Coulter, Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin. Besides the fact that the combined IQs of the former group don’t equal any one of the latter, our women look like women. The best part is, none of five conservative women I mentioned would disagree with me. The former group would slap you with some kind of injunction for making a remark like that at the next meeting. At least our girls know where Mars is. For that matter, at least our girls know what Mars is.

2. On The Job.

Unemployment has remained a thorn in the American economic side for the better part of Obama’s term. Factor in the number of people who are so discouraged by Obamanomics, and the number rises to close to 15 percent. That’s 15 percent of a workforce that easily exceeds 100 million people. Imagine everyone in the New York metropolitan area updating their resumes at the same time. Add the illegal aliens who the Democrats — and a fair number of the Republicans — won’t address in a meaningful manner, and the math gets even more muy malo. Of course, the Democrats will suggest that the illegals are doing only the jobs that no one else wants. I’ll admit, mowing Nancy Pelosi’s lawn doesn’t sound like a day at the beach, but where are these Americans who are happily living off the dole? I mean, outside Detroit.

1.  It’s The Constitution.

Four words: Attorney General Eric Holder.

Of course, I left off more than a few good reasons to avoid voting for Obama and/or his fellow clown car riders. Hell, trying to pin down only eight was tougher than figuring out who the 10 biggest douchebags are at a personal injury lawyers’ convention.

This November’s Presidential election will indeed be a landmark event in American politics. Will we choose to play Horatio at the bridge, standing tall against the march of liberal statism? Or will we dive into the river, in which we will surely drown?

–Ben Crystal

The Price Of Fame

I recently faced an attack from a liberal acquaintance. Given the tendency of most liberals to react to differing opinions with all the restraint of Bill Clinton in the plus-size misses department, I shouldn’t have been surprised at the level of venom spewed forth from this particular individual; but it caught me off guard nonetheless. The fellow objected strongly to my remarking on the hypocrisy that tagged along on first lady Michelle Obama’s vacation to the spectacularly wealthy ski resort of Aspen, Colo.

The individual in question was outraged — outraged, I say! — that I would dare to besmirch Obama’s good name, even suggesting I was suffering from something he called “Obama Derangement Syndrome.” (Author’s aside to liberals: “Obama Derangement Syndrome?” Cribbing Rush Limbaugh? I thought you liberals fancied yourselves the creative types.) I’m going to assume that the symptoms of ODS include an inability to ignore liberal arrogance and hypocrisy, accompanied by the urge to make remarks that liberals find entirely acceptable except when they’re directed at their own masters.

Suffice it to say, this cat’s claws came out sharp. He thought tagging the first lady with a political barb was unacceptable. To him, and to the rest of the legion of liberals who read the Personal Liberty Digest™ on a regular basis, I say: She seems to enjoy the spotlight, and you all can’t seem to get enough of shining it on her; hotter than you expected, isn’t it?

During the Presidency of George W. Bush, his twin daughters made themselves a virtual staple of the political comedy circuit. To be fair, when the first daughters forced their Secret Service detail to stand outside the 7-Eleven while they tried to eyelid-bat the clerk into letting them buy a 4-pack of Bartles & Jaymes®, even smarmy little bridge trolls like Janeane Garofalo got to join the fun. Now that the Oval Office occupant meets with the liberals’ approval, the first family has evidently fallen off the “approved for mockery” list.

Obama makes the talk show circuits, attends the multimillion-dollar fundraisers, smiles at us from the covers of half the glossies in the supermarket checkout line and tells us to “Move it!” She has become a fashion icon, and she mingles with the wine-and-cheese set wearing dresses that cost more than the average family’s car.  She proudly wears the robes, but we’re expected not to notice how poorly they fit.

In Aspen, she and the kids stayed at the multimillion-dollar home of a multimillionaire Democratic sugar daddy and Barack Obama crony. The first family’s Christmas trip to Hawaii involved two different planes, as did their trip to Martha’s Vineyard. And the cost of her trip to Spain could have covered the bills for the private planes Al Gore uses to shuttle between his science fiction conventions. (All right, that last one isn’t true. Jet fuel is expensive.)

You want to enjoy the trappings of power and wealth? Have at it. We conservatives have no interest in denying anyone success. But don’t turn around and tell us only you deserve it. To put in a parlance many of your liberal millionaire and billionaire cronies ought to recognize (having heard it more than once, I’m sure): That sort of thing is unseemly, Madame.

God forbid anyone suggest that the first lady — being such a strong woman — should ever take the back seat to her husband. But perhaps the President might suggest her next vacation involve a visit to a knock-off theme park and an outlet mall. All those caviar-and-champagne photo ops don’t translate particularly well to the majority of us who party with hot dogs and beer.

Liberals insist the rest of us show the same deference to Obama that they denied the Bush daughters, their grandmother (Barbara-Bush-looks-old jokes. Brilliant!) and even Sarah Palin’s Down Syndrome-afflicted son Trig. Yet, women to whom they object politically (Palin and Michele Bachmann come to mind) have been subjected to savagery that ought to involve a prison sentence. At least Palin and Bachmann put their money where their mouths are. If Obama wants to act like Marie Antoinette, she’s going to have to eat the cake.

The Price We Pay

The supermarket is not a place where anyone hopes for surprises. Beyond a winning lottery ticket, finding a coupon for 10 percent off a 12-pack of Pabst Blue Ribbon or getting a smile from the cute checkout girl, surprises at the supermarket usually involve forgetting the shopping list, finding out they’re out of PBR (horrors!) or discovering that the price of some staple has skyrocketed.

While pushing my cart through the aisles the other day, I discovered the price of my favorite brand of pasta had reached $1.69 per box — nearly a dollar more than it cost the day President Barack Obama took office. Since I’m the sort of fellow whose feats of culinary legerdemain away from the grill lean toward boiling water or making really outstanding… reservations, a hike in the price of pasta strikes fear in my heart. Imagine the compounded trepidation that sent a shiver down my spine when I realized the price of macaroni and cheese has also embarked on a northward climb. Since the cost of Doritos and Pop Tarts also rose, we know three things to be true:

  1. The prices of staple groceries are climbing across the board, meaning middle-class families are coughing up more of their hard-earned pay for food purchases.
  2. The economy is still mired in the economic quicksand of the past couple of years.
  3. Bachelors nationwide are in serious danger of starvation.

That list seems out of place, especially considering the days-of-wine-and-roses claptrap that the Democrats and their minions in the corporate media have been serving up of late. In fact, add the price of gasoline and the middle class, about whom President Obama and his accomplices claim to be so concerned, once again teeters on the edge of the fiscal precipice. In 2006, Senator Barbara Boxer held a shrieking press conference at a Washington, D.C.-area gas station to complain about President George W. Bush’s lack of action on gas prices, which were lower than they are now. If Boxer is now demanding answers from Obama, I haven’t heard her.

Any working stiff can tell you: The prices at the grocery store, the gas station, the pharmacist and even the sport shop where he buys bulk ammunition have risen dramatically, outstripping inflationary increases. There’s no sign that the pricing trend will slow down, much less revert to pre-Obama levels.

Although the wine-and-cheese-millionaire set backing Obama and the Democrats won’t discuss it, food prices in the United States rose as much as 10 percent in 2011, with most experts agreeing even more dramatic price hikes should be expected for 2012 and beyond. The liberal elite’s feigned concern for us common folk begins with meaningless rhetoric and baseless finger-pointing and ends with, well, meaningless rhetoric and baseless finger-pointing. None of the major economic indicators have shown anything but costlier trends since Obama arrived in the White House on a wave of hope and change (not to mention race-baiting and hate speech).

Where are the sunnier days and star-filled nights Obama and the Democrats promised us? Surely, things must have improved somewhat. After all, I hardly think Michelle Obama would have taken the kids skiing in the millionaire’s playground of Aspen, Colo. if there were a chance that someone might misinterpret their snowbound cavorting for Marie Antoinette-like disregard for the “little people.”

The truth, I expect, is far worse. I doubt the perspectives of the millions of Americans suffering under the yoke of Obama’s economy ever entered Michelle Obama’s mind. It is a fair bet that the plight of everyday Americans has gone — and will continue to go — unrecognized by the liberal millionaires who claim to have a monopoly on “caring.”  Their version of “caring” extends only as far as giving a decent tip to the valet at the restaurant, throwing a couple of extra bones for their caddie at the golf club and perhaps dropping a few coins in the Styrofoam cup that belongs to the homeless guy on the sidewalk. Beyond that, “caring” is reserved for speeches, fundraisers (at which they tell each other how much they care, in between white wine spritzers) and campaign ads.

In 1992, President George H.W. Bush stepped on a publicity land mine when he was unable to give an accurate price for a gallon of milk. Democrats, eager to play Bush as an out-of-touch elitist, hammered him for not knowing the economic circumstances of average Americans. Fast-forward to 2012, and I wonder if liberals like the Obamas even care.

Amnesty’s Real Consequences

Last summer, a 66-year-old Chicago-area insurance broker named Denny McCann met his tragic end when he was run down by a motorist named Saul Chavez. At the time of the accident, Chavez — who dragged McCann’s body a few hundred feet while trying to flee the scene — had a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .29. For everyone outside Lindsay Lohan and about half the remaining Kennedys, a BAC of .29 has passed wearing the lampshade and is sleeping with the coat rack. For Chavez, a BAC of .29 was well past the limit at which he could control a motor vehicle. For McCann, a BAC of .29 was fatal.

The tale of Chavez and his motoring misadventures is already a tragedy. An examination of Chavez’s driving record turns it tragicomic. Evidently, Chavez has made a practice out of getting behind the wheel sauced to the gills. In fact, his re-enactment of the worst parts of a Ted Kennedy biopic — which left the McCann family in mourning — was not the first time he was apprehended. In fact, Chavez might  have been making license plates for the cars he could no longer legally drive were it not for a justice system with a soft spot for alcoholic Mario Andretti impersonators.

As if the sordid saga of Chavez wasn’t already sorrowful enough, there’s another twist which is even more wretched: Chavez isn’t even supposed to be here. In addition to being a dangerous boozehound, Chavez is an illegal alien. To make matters almost ludicrous, authorities in Chicago — in keeping with the Windy City’s “sanctuary city” politics — knew about Chavez’s undocumented status three years before he killed McCann. The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement was unaware of Chavez’s wild rides through the Windy City because Chicago deliberately refused to tip off the Feds as a matter of policy. As noted in a recent investigation into the Chavez story by The Daily Caller, Chicago is one of the cities that ignores President Barack Obama’s own Secure Communities program. Cook County authorities actively refuse to cooperate with immigration authorities on cases involving illegals — including a specific detainer for Chavez, who has now fled the jurisdiction without a trace.

Even in cities that try to abide by immigration law, delivering justice to immigration-law violators and their accomplices is a trick; Chavez is hardly the only illegal immigrant to break our laws with fatal results. So-called “sanctuary cities” like Obama’s beloved, Democratic-machine-run Chicago give parasites like Chavez a place to hide and feed off unsuspecting citizens without consequence.

It doesn’t take genius to understand why the Democrats want to reward illegals like Chavez; the liberal presumption is that amnesty will turn into votes. They’re robbing Peter to pay Paco. But their strategy carries an inherent risk: Anyone willing to crawl across the desert to trim Warren Buffett’s hedges possesses a far stronger work ethic than a sizeable number of the Democrats’ base. When the newly acknowledged citizens find out they’re going to have to chip in to carry the corpulent dependent-class types who already sold their votes (and souls) to the Democrats in return for taxpayer-funded largesse, they may decide to deliver their votes to someone else. And they will have the muscle to play kingmaker.

In the meantime, some of the same people upon whom Obama and the Democrats want to bestow the gift of citizenship despite their flouting of the law are taking our money, our jobs and — in some cases — our lives.

The Greatest Waste Of All

By the time I bothered to log on to Facebook this past Saturday, Whitney Houston had been dead for a few hours. It’s not that I wasn’t paying particularly close attention to the wires on Saturday, it’s just that I was not paying particularly close attention to anything on Saturday. Suffice it to say, when I logged on to “the Book,” the first thing I noticed was a stream of posts about the demise of America’s erstwhile sweetheart.

Some of the status updates regarding Houston tended toward the shamefully cliched: “Crack is whack!” What incisive wits with which so many Facebookers are blessed! Elsewhere, the inappropriately maudlin held sway: “Rest now, Whitney. You were the voice of a generation.” Houston was born in 1963. Her birth year places her at the end of the baby boomer generation. While I won’t argue that Houston could sing magnificently (a fact reflected in her stratospheric record sales), I’m not sure she was the “voice of a generation.”  And spare us the crocodile tears, people; you didn’t know her personally.

The rest of those who shared some sentiment regarding Houston’s death offered varying themes of the “cautionary tale.” I will grant that Houston’s apparently self-induced death is a cautionary tale, but let’s not overstate the case. Pretty much every minute of Houston’s last two decades or so served as a cautionary tale. And the warning it carries has nothing to do with the tragedy of addiction, nor does it sound some alarm regarding the perils of fame.

The cautionary tale told by Houston’s death centers on the fact that Americans care far too much about precisely the wrong people. Houston was a gifted singer who frittered away her talent, her image, her career and ultimately her life by behaving like a spoiled child with access to a piggy bank the size of the hogs at the 4-H club’s livestock pavilion. Another supremely talented singer/actor eschewed logic at every turn and ignored even her own advice and snuffed herself out well ahead of schedule. That makes Houston about as remarkable as an abandoned building in Detroit.

To say our culture is celebrity-obsessed is trite. It would also undersell the point. Houston died, and the Nation donned its funeral suit. But she simply added her own name to a list which stretches back across decades. Billie Holliday, Hank Williams, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Keith Moon and John Bonham shuffled off their mortal coils in similar fashion. The President of the United States made a political joke about “Biggie and Tupac” at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Oh, what a chuckler! Two “gangsta-rappers” who spent their entire careers living off angry “music” glorifying shocking violence, drug abuse and almost cartoonishly horrendous behavior died in a manner befitting their lyrics. Tee-hee, Mr. President.

Steven Tyler and Keith Richards have somehow evaded the reaper, but their infamously hard lifestyles are winked at by fans and pundits alike. We know their approaching ends are well-deserved; we even laugh with them about it. But then, so many of us will try to attach ourselves to their deaths in the worst way possible. When we treat these people and their self-destructiveness as somehow acceptable — even noble (Houston is “singing to the angels”?); we set the bar awfully low.

Doubtlessly, some of you will email Bob, demanding he fire me, reprimand me or otherwise punish me for what some might mistake for my dancing on Houston’s grave. To you, I say: “You’re seriously missing the point.”  Don’t weep for Houston. Don’t act horrified by her death. Don’t endeavor to turn her early departure for the grave into what Obama Administration Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske described as a “teachable moment.” Do shake your head at the waste of talent. Do blame her for failing herself and her family. And do remember there were, are and will be better people who pass on through tragic and/or heroic circumstances who won’t be the subject of awards-show memorials, fawning print and Web retrospectives or coldhearted columns like this one.

Editor’s note: Over the next several days we will be making upgrades to our site. During this time, you may see some issues, including but not limited to the site loading more slowly than normal. Additionally, on Thursday morning your ability to post comments will be turned off for a few hours. These upgrades should be completed by Friday morning if all goes as planned. Thanks for your patience. –BL


The Poodles Of War

The echoes of his oath of office had barely faded when President Barack Obama added another accolade to his resume. Just nine days after he began his occupation of the White House, Barack Hussein Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, which he infamously won. Although the prestige of the Nobel laureates has declined in recent years (their number includes the murderous Islamofascist Yasser Arafat and the faux-scientist Al Gore), Obama’s win was hailed by his minions as proof that his ascension from obscurity was the first step toward a modern-day Pax Americana.

Unfortunately, much like the votes of millions of people who were duped by a campaign heavy on simplistic turns of phrase (“hope and change”) and light on depth, the votes of the Nobel Prize Committee were miscast. Obama’s promises of a more peaceful world under his watch flitted like ash from the pyres of global conflict. The pullout from Iraq fades against the continued battles in Afghanistan. The NATO strikes that both literally and figuratively killed off Gadhafi in Libya — for which Obama proudly took credit — have produced a civil war that rages on.

Meanwhile, the situation in Syria is developing into a magnified version of the Libyan quagmire. For those of you who missed Bob Livingston’s Friday column Has World War III Begun?, Syria is shaping up to be a proxy fight between East and West. My concerns are:

  • The vocally belligerent and potentially nuclear-armed Iranians have chosen to back the Syrians in general and Bashar Assad in particular, despite the fact that most Syrians are Sunni and the Iranians are primarily Shiite. That happens to be a religious distinction that has spurred on more than a few shooting wars in the Levant and surrounding regions over the centuries — a lesson the Iranians evidently missed during their decade of war with Iraq.
  • Obama’s allegiances are, at best, in question. As we recently learned, his Administration leaked valuable intel to Iran regarding Israeli defensive strategies.
  • Both Iran and Syria enjoy material support from both the ChiComs and the Russians. Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to enjoy armed conflict as much as he enjoys posing shirtless for pictures. The ChiComs have also demonstrated a lack of compunction when it comes to killing people. The neighborhood drunk and the neighborhood bully have joined forces, and in front of them lie at least two nations in Iran and Syria whose leaders believe spreading Islamofascism is God’s own work. Don’t think for one moment that Obama’s ham-fisted domestic acumen and mewling foreign policy have escaped their collective notice.

What gives me the greatest pause is the fact that Obama is allowing — is being forced to allow — the British and French to press forward into a conflict which looks to be the combat equivalent of gasoline on a five-alarm fire. Nobel laureate Obama is perfectly willing to commit our troops and material to battle, but is either unwilling or unable to lead from the front.

To be fair, it is entirely possible that Obama is so overwhelmed with the fallout from his Administration’s scandals and incompetence on the home front that he simply lacks the wherewithal to focus on the growing difficulties abroad. Should that be the case, the American electorate can remedy the situation by dismissing Obama from office in the fall. However, I suspect his minions want war. The members of the Democratic elite have been redoubtable in their efforts to portray the man who won the Nobel Peace Prize on speculation as a wartime stalwart. Should war erupt over Syria before Election Day, look for Obama’s horde to deploy the same “don’t change horses” strategy they used during the 2004 Presidential election. But the perils of entering new conflicts behind a leader who defines the pejorative front-runner are legion.

The Democratic Party has positioned itself as the anti-war party since the regrettable tenure of President Jimmy Carter while beating the drums when war suited their needs. President Bill Clinton certainly proved that by lobbing cruise missiles at dark-skinned people every time he needed cover for another bimbo eruption.

And for the first time in most of our lifetimes, the lesser nations of the world openly mock the United States, as well as consort and conspire with whomever they wish without fear. I wouldn’t follow these duplicitous Democrats to the bathroom; none of us should follow them into war.

–Ben Crystal

The Motor City Molehill

The kerfuffle over Clint Eastwood’s starring role in the now-infamous Chrysler ad that aired during the Super Bowl might be a tad overheated. A Hollywood icon strolling down some dimly lit urban side street delivered what I expect was supposed to be a rousing motivational speech, but ended up:

  • Incomprehensible: “It’s halftime… this isn’t a game.” (Which is it?)
  • Grammatically challenged: “This country can’t be knocked out with one punch; we get right back up again. And when we do, the world’s gonna hear the roar of our engines.”  (Flag on the play! Too many mixed metaphors on the field! That’s 15 yards and loss of simile!)
  • Just plain silly: “The people of Detroit… almost lost everything.” (They gave it away willingly.)

After 120 seconds of Eastwood pronouncing mashed-potato platitudes in his trademark growl, the logos of the various divisions of the post-bailout Chrysler Corporation flashed briefly on the screen beneath Chrysler’s sophomoric slogan: “Imported from Detroit™.”

I can grasp the idea of some folks knotting their undies after sitting through a jumble of non sequiturs ostensibly scripted to make them want to buy one of the union-thug crafted, taxpayer-funded jalopies while watching what was otherwise a very competitive football game — no matter who collected the paycheck for the voice-over. Perhaps viewers might have been less incensed by the interruption if the steely-eyed Eastwood had shot it out with Lee van Cleef while racing across the Mojave in a Jeep Wrangler. Or maybe Eastwood could have screeched through the hairpins of Lombard Street in a brand new Challenger drop top, a young Sandra Locke pinned to the passenger seat, hot on the tail of some San Francisco bad guy. But he wandered like a senile pensioner through some steamy concrete jungle (which turned out to be New Orleans in the role of the Motor City) while lecturing us like a cranky old neighbor about the value of an automaker that has been bailed out more than a leaky rowboat. That’s lousy advertising.

It is not, however, controversial. Beyond the waste of taxpayer dollars with which Chrysler (and General Motors Co.) will forever be deservedly linked, there’s nothing about the so-called “Halftime in America” spot that is innately controversial. Some Hollywood millionaire snared an easy paycheck (which he gave to charity) reciting a two-minute script that reads like it was assembled from a century’s worth of throwaways from forgotten locker-room speeches, and we all have to hear how Karl Rove told The Washington Post that he was offended? How does ol’ neocon Rove feel about the fact that millions of Americans have given up looking for work in the Barack Obama economy? White House flacks David Axelrod and Dan Pfeiffer both tweeted their support for the ad. Where is Axelrod on the revelations that Obama and the Democrats took hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from the family of a Mexican drug lord who is a fugitive from justice? Where does Pfeiffer stand on Obama’s Constitution-abrogating decision to force Church-affiliated organizations to pay for everything except partial-birth abortions for their employees?

There are moments in which I suspect our leaders — whether elected or self-appointed — are willingly cooperating in an effort to distract us from the issues at hand. The fact that elitists both Democrat and Republican were ready to rev their rhetorical engines the moment the “Halftime in America” spot hit the airwaves makes me think I’m closer to the truth than I’d probably like to be. Let’s keep our eyes on the prize, people. Don’t be distracted by the hood ornaments or the 6.4 liter V-8.

By the way, the coolest car Eastwood ever drove onscreen was the 1972 Gran Torino from the 2008 film of the same name. The Gran Torino was built by un-bailed-out Ford and “imported” from Lorain, Ohio. Chrysler, Obama, Axelrod, Rove and Pfeiffer all wish they drove that nice a ride. If we keep allowing them to divert our attention from the issues that matter, so will we.

Interrupting The Race For The Cure

There is an old political trope that suggests abortion occupies its own rhetorical niche; that it is a topic worthy of Macbeth: It produces “sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

I suspect those who make abortion into such a controversial subject are the most ardent supporters of the procedure. In trying to stifle debate before it begins, they are not trying to preserve civility; instead, they are protecting their beloved practice.

Last week, the Susan G. Komen Foundation announced it would cut funding to the Nation’s top abortion provider: Planned Parenthood. Komen’s decision stemmed from its policy of not funding organizations that draw the scrutiny of Federal investigations. Planned Parenthood is currently being investigated for alleged routing of Federal subsidies to abortions. Komen’s decision provoked a firestorm of controversy, including a barrage of anger from some of the Democratic Party’s most venomous villains. George Soros-controlled, which formed in the late 1990s to protect President Bill Clinton from the fallout from perjury, went so far as to suggest that Komen had “declared war on women.”

The idea that Komen, one of the world’s leading groups dedicated to fighting a disease that afflicts one in eight women, is in any way conducting a campaign against the fairer sex is ludicrous. The idea that Komen should have to answer such slander from left-wing vermin like is appalling. Komen’s track record of redoubtable determination in the face of cancer is nothing short of heroic. How tragic, then, that liberals would place protecting the abominable practice of abortion above protecting millions of women from an insidious disease.

That’s the real line in this particular politically charged sandbox. In fact, the crime against nature, life and God which is abortion is almost tangential. Komen is a huge organization that raises millions of dollars annually to assist in the search for a cure for breast cancer. Planned Parenthood is a huge organization that absorbs millions of dollars annually to provide what they consider women’s health care. Of course, women’s health care is merely code for abortion. Why the duplicity? Because Planned Parenthood is protecting its money, and less money flows to groups that crow about their status as the Nation’s leading practitioner of abortion.

By shutting off the cash spigot (albeit only temporarily), Komen ran afoul of the money-grubbing abortionists at Planned Parenthood and their rabid battalion of supporters. As many people have noted, Komen’s real mistake was in failing to anticipate the fallout from such a move — especially given the monolithic and very loud nature of liberal hatred. It’s worth noting that Komen has made no statements regarding the organization’s position on abortion. It’s too busy fighting cancer — and liberals.

–Ben Crystal

The Wrong Lesson

Late last week, retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin, an outspoken Christian, spoke during a prayer breakfast in Ocean City, Md. Boykin discussed his personal spirituality and how it was interwoven throughout his life and career. Under normal circumstances, a retired war horse addressing a group of citizens in a small resort city attracts less attention than the surf report in a retirement community. But the left-wing hate group People for the American Way and the terrorist-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations decided to make Boykin’s speech the event of the offseason.

Following the hubbub, Boykin “has decided to withdraw speaking at West Point’s National Prayer Breakfast” on Feb. 8, according to a statement issued by the U.S. Military Academy. Boykin’s withdrawal followed a round of complaints from PFAW, CAIR and others. A statement by CAIR’s executive director Nihad Awad read:

We welcome Mr. Boykin’s withdrawal from this event and hope that the speaker who replaces him will offer cadets a spiritual message that promotes tolerance and mutual understanding.

When did tolerance and understanding earn a place in CAIR’s belief system? CAIR’s founders are the aforementioned Awad and Omar Ahmad, both former officers of the Islamic Association of Palestine. In his book Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad, former FBI analyst and U.S. Treasury Department intelligence official Mathew Levitt described IAP as “intimately tied to the most senior Hamas leadership.” Let’s not sugarcoat it, people. CAIR is an Islamic terrorist public relations firm.

Some of you will read this and wonder why I didn’t discuss Mitt Romney’s triumph in Florida’s RINO-match of a primary or something equally as politically immediate. I will respond by warning you not to dismiss tales of this nature. A retired veteran was denied an opportunity to share fellowship with the cadets at West Point because of pressure brought by fringe liberals with a decided left-wing agenda and ties to terrorist groups. This is precisely the sort of camouflaged incrementalism that weakens the Nation from the roots up. What CAIR and its accomplices accomplished in pressuring West Point to send Boykin packing is a step toward policy. West Point isn’t some resort town; it’s one of the places from which the future leaders of our armed forces — men and women like Boykin — will be culled. What lessons will those future leaders learn when extremist groups can successfully censor the opinions of the leaders who came before them? More importantly, what lessons will they miss?

It is true that Boykin holds some fairly strong opinions about Islamofascists. That ought to surprise no one since his career sometimes pitted him against Islamofascists. Furthermore, Boykin’s opinions are less than shocking, considering the fact that Islamofascists hardly try to hide their feelings about him (and the rest of us). But to punish Boykin at the behest of vermin like CAIR and PFAW is the wrong message from the wrong people at the wrong time.

The Fast And The Spurious VI: The Never-Ending Story

Perhaps they thought they would get away with it. After all, President Barack Obama and his henchmen have secured get-out-of-jail-free cards for every other crime against the people, the Constitution and common decency since Obama was just an ex-“community organizer” with stars in his eyes and a dog-eared copy of “Rules for Radicals” in his pocket.

Perhaps they thought that deliberately hiding the documentation of their latest misadventure with a carefully timed Friday night document dump would work, and that a Nation that prefers its politics served fresh Monday through Friday would simply miss the new revelations in the fog of grill smoke and the din of peewee hockey games.

Whatever Obama and his henchmen thought, they were wrong.

This past Friday evening, Obama’s cleaning service cleared out a few more file cabinets. Included in the latest peculiarly timed document dump was an email chain extending to the office of Attorney General Eric Holder regarding the murder of Border Agent Brian Terry. The electronic exchange began just after midnight the day after Terry was shot with an alert to the former U.S. Attorney and now waiting-for-his-guest-spot-on-MSNBC and OFF point man Dennis Burke:

On December 14, 2010, a BORTAC agent working in the Nogales, AZ AOR was shot. The agent was conducting Border Patrol operations 18 miles north of the international boundary when he encountered [redacted word] unidentified subjects. Shots were exchanged resulting in the agent being shot.

That message — which Burke forwarded to Holder’s chief of staff Monty Wilkinson — was followed shortly after by another: “Our agent has passed away.” Wilkinson responded: “Tragic. I’ve alerted the AG…”

“Tragic. I’ve alerted the AG…” Wilkinson apprised Holder of the murder of Brian Terry on Dec. 15, 2010, six months before Holder testified under oath in front of Congress that he had known about OFF for only a “few weeks.” He later retracted that testimony in front of the Senate. Holder lied, and then he lied about lying. And even that was a lie.

As if that weren’t appalling enough, a later message from Burke to Wilkinson read:

The guns found in the desert near the murder (sic) BP officer… were AK-47s purchased at a Phoenix gun store.

The latter messages prove either that Holder perjured himself in front of Congress on no fewer than two occasions or that describing him as “stupendously incompetent” is an astounding understatement. Should the former be the case, the logical progression leads to two questions:

1. Why?
2. Who told him to do it?

Given the performance of the Obama Administration so far, the answers to both are laughably obvious — and both involve the sort of nefarious deeds unseen in the White House since President Richard Nixon’s “plumbers” checked into the Watergate.

We may fairly presume that Obama will continue to behave as if the scandal surrounding OFF is, as Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) claimed, a racist attempt to smear Obama and Holder. But Friday night’s undercover document dump relegates that clichéd reaction to the same intellectual dustbin containing Johnson’s musings on the buoyancy of Guam.

The refusal of the self-described “most transparent administration in history” to acknowledge, much less address, Holder and his involvement with OFF is borderline criminal. The attempts to hide documentation revealing the extent of Holder’s (and by extension, Obama’s) mendacity are grounds for a great deal more than bad polling numbers. Former President Bill Clinton was impeached — and ultimately disbarred — for perjury, and he was lying only about an overweight intern. It’s time for Obama and his little buddy Holder to face justice — justice of their own making.

The Global Warning On Global Warming

Some time ago, I described the pseudo-scientific theory of so-called “global warming” as “the phrenology of the modern age.” In light of the latest avalanche of actual scientific evidence, it would appear I was actually being a bit on the generous side. After all, while practitioners of phrenology might have been as far off the mark as an Al Gore slide show, at least they were trying to help someone else. The only beneficiaries of the global warming hoax are the hoaxsters themselves. While that means only that global warming is no different than virtually every other aspect of liberalism, it also means that every aspect of American society is threatened.

The latest crack in global warming’s crumbling wall appeared last week in the United Kingdom with a quiet acknowledgement by the UK’s Met Office and the University of East Anglia that not only is the Earth not warming, the oven is off and the pilot light is out. Moreover, data collected from more than 30,000 measuring stations and released last week have put the deep freeze on global warming, instead indicating that the temperature trend pointed to by global warmists peaked in 1997.

Additionally, the current solar cycle has reached its maximum output and is, therefore, headed into what scientists call “Cycle 25,” which researchers at NASA and the University of Arizona have declared will be much weaker than solar cycles over the past century. In fact, the latest Met Office research predicts that Cycle 25 and subsequent 11-year solar cycles will likely approach the “Dalton minimum” for solar output, matching the solar slump which lowered Europe’s mean temperatures by 2 degrees centigrade during the 18th and 19th centuries. Some scientists predict solar energy could bottom out even further, matching the “Maunder minimum” — the coolest period of the “Little Ice Age” — which held the planet in its chilly grip from the mid-16th to mid-19th centuries.

According to leading observers from respected institutions, the failure of global warmists to credit the sun for its role in global temperature swings nearly obviates the entire global warming industry. Nicola Scafetta, Ph.D., of Duke University notes:

If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories.

It’s fair to presume that he’s already omitting global warmists from the “scientific community” given the remote likelihood that they will abandon the scam which has kept them in clover since the early 1970s, when the same climactic phrenologists who roar about global warming now were shrieking about global cooling.

These latest revelations about the myriad flaws and scientific method violations that mark the progression of the global warming theories combine with the well-established fact that global warmists have never employed more than anecdotal evidence that the basis of their fearmongering even exists to produce what ought to be a final curtain for global warming and the entire so-called “climate change” industry.

And yet, I have a theory — based on decades’ worth of firsthand observation — that neither global warming nor the industry its proponents spawned will be headed for the booth next to the tinfoil-hat salesmen at the next Flat Earth Society conference. Despite the altruistic claims of leading global warmists from Gore to the Headlands Institute eggheads, they’re highly unlikely to abandon their cause for the same two reasons nanny-staters have been pressing their jackboots down upon the necks of people across the world since time immemorial:

  1. Money.
  2. Power.

Consider Obama’s continued devotion to so-called “green jobs” boondoggles, despite the Brobdingnagian barrelsful of taxpayer cash that they absorb without producing any quantifiable benefit. Solyndra, LightSquared and Ener1 (which flatlined right after Obama’s State of the Union address last week) have combined to cost the taxpayers billions of dollars in unrecoverable funds. All of them are fiscal disasters, yet Obama swore during the same address to continue to shovel our money into their gaping maws. In some cases, the output of these “green” ventures is dangerous: What’s the total amount of greenhouse outgassing produced by a burning Chevy Volt?

Gore sells books and video copies of his Oscar-winning slide show. He also lives like a pharaoh. Outside the pile of money left behind by his tobacco-baron father, Gore’s lavish lifestyle is funded almost entirely by his exploitation of global warming fear. And he’s hardly alone. In “No Need to Panic About Global Warming,” an opinion piece that appeared in The Wall Street Journal last week, 16 scientists noted:

Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet.

The column also noted the striking similarities between the global warmists’ method of enforcing their dogma with retribution and even banishment and the intellectual dark ages of the Soviet Union, in which anyone who opposed Trofim Lysenko’s ludicrously medieval scientific theories was stripped of prestige, imprisoned and even killed.

To be fair, the world could probably benefit from a reduction in the population of arrogant pseudo-intellectual academics. And it almost goes without saying that anything that cuts the odds that Gore might show up in your town (flying a private jet, of course) to make you and your neighbors sit through one of his monotonous lectures on bumper-sticker science is — well — good. But global warmists have infiltrated virtually every aspect of public life. They are turning once-respectable universities into black holes of meaningful thought. They drain billions of dollars from the Treasury in pure cash and then drain millions of dollars more in meaningless regulations that have no effect on the jungles, but crush industrial output. They create idiotic bureaucratic boondoggles (like the Kyoto Protocol) that ripple through the global economic strata, hiking prices and ruining lives.

The food we eat, the fuel we need and the items we require (incandescent light bulbs, anyone?) are all more expensive, more scarce and more needlessly regulated because liberals like Obama recognize the value of fear over reason and the value of lockstep-marching minions who act without question.

Scientists ought to be consumed with the search for facts. As last week’s news — along with decades of actual data — proves, one fact is clear: Global warming hasn’t reduced our quality of life; global warmists have.

Sorry State Of The Union

My fellow Americans:

What an honor to be standing above you this evening. I mean for you, of course. Tonight, you mark the third anniversary of my ascent. With your continued obedience, it will not be my last. In fact, if all my plans for you come to fruition, I figure I’ve got at least 30 more of these to go.

I would like to first acknowledge some noteworthies. Seated behind me is the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden. Hey, Joe. Joe. Joe. Joe, put down the sippy cup! Did you remember to go before we started?

Seated next to Vice President Biden is Speaker of the House John “The Man with the Tan” Boehner. Eventually, I’ll be able to book you a spot where you will really sport a savage tan. The Guantanamo Bay Spa? Bring your sand wedge, buddy.

And where’s my Michelle? Heck, you can’t miss her. Get moving, right to the Taco Bell! What? I figure since we already use two of everything else: limos, Air Force jets and vacations, we might as well use both bedrooms, right? That’s a nice dress, honey. Which one of your taxpayer-funded, take-along-a-few-dozen-of-your-best-friends-and-live-it-up-like-Oprah trips did you pick that one up on? Are those diamonds? Isn’t being rich awesome?

Where’s my other girl? Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi! Hey, Nancy, why so surprised? Oh, um, right. Awkward. But seriously, what a job she did laying the groundwork for my invasi — er — election! How many people watching this even remember that the House approval ratings under Nancy’s Speakership were as crappy as they are now? Oh, right. We suppressed that, didn’t we? Nancy, of all the duplicitous, multimillionaire hypocrites at the top of the liberal food chain, you’re definitely one.

And there’s Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Harry, you can put Nancy’s purse down when you’re in chambers, pal. How long has it been since you and your fellow Senate Democrats have even offered a budget? I think I was still helping ACORN fill out absentee ballots the last time.

Down to my left, the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Guys, I know I ran on an anti-war platform, but no one told me blowing stuff up is so awesome! Did you see that resurgence of Gadhafi loyalists in Libya? Come by the Situation Room tomorrow. We’re going to continue the war we were never fighting to begin with over there. Grab some of the boys I deployed to Uganda without telling anyone. And we need to go over our plan for the invasion of Iran, toward which we are totally not ramping.

Down in front: the Supreme Court of the United States, the last line of defense of the Constitution — whatever the hell that is. Keep whispering, Justices Thomas and Alito. Attorney General Eric Holder needs to see you after the speech tonight, boys.

And where’s Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor? Hey, Mitch: I’ve decided to declare you in session. Now, you’re not. Now, you are. Now, you’re not. Ha-ha-ha! Don’t you glare at me. Ask Senator Rand Paul what happens to prominent opposition politicians who hassle me. Dr. Jellyfinger to the House Chamber, stat!

Up in the gallery: the corporate media. Without your willing complicity, this would be a whole lot more difficult. “Any criticism of Obama is code for racism.” That’s brilliant. And you conservative commentators? Four words: National Defense Authorization Act. Four more: indefinite detention without trial. You feeling me?

As for the State of the Union: I have moved us from two shooting wars to 2½. If the timing works, Iran will be next. The economy is in the toilet, and I intend to close the lid and nail it shut. We’re going to beg, borrow and steal whatever we need to push pet projects like Solyndra and cover cronies like Jeff Immelt when he sends jobs overseas. More Americans than ever are on government assistance; and if I have anything to do with it, we’re going to make that a clean 100 percent. Meanwhile, most of my “achievements” have forced us to run up debt like a second wife on Rodeo Drive. Don’t worry, though. We’ll bill your grandchildren.

To liberals watching me tonight: Keep it up, and we’ll put you on the top of the approval list for one of GM’s combustible golf carts. To the non-liberals: Pay no attention to the Homeland Security strike team outside your front door.

Good night and Alla — er — God bless me!

–Ben Crystal